St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1887-04-19

reasonable and just, has prohibited in section
2 all manner of unjust determinations, has
forbidden in section all undue and unreal
sonable preferences and advantages, has re-
auired in the same section reasonable and
equal facilities for the interchange of traffic
and has prohibited in section the pooling OF
treights That, in substance, is the inter-
state commerce law. There is
NOTHING NOVEL
in these provisions. They simply bring back
the business of the common carriers to the
well settled principles OF the common law.
Yet no one can deny that there was urgent
need of their statutory formulation. Alleged
difficulties in putting them in operation only
disclose examples OF the extent to which
they have been violated in the past. The
sections of the act are expressed in plain
words. A construction must be given to
them in the first instance by the carriers and
their patrons. When course of conduct has
been adopted, of which complaint is
made that 1t violates the law the
decision of the question will rest
with the courts or with the commission as the
complaining party may elect. This is the Or
derby method in which all legislation is adj
mInistered and applied, and the statute IN
question presents no exception. One more
suggestion may properly be added: 1t APP
pears from the clamorous petitions that have
been laid before us for preliminary advice,
many of them upon the suggestion if not by
the procurement OF the carriers, that common
comment upon the law by the carriers and
those who have heretofore enjoyed special
favorS at their hands, describe the stem of
penalties which the law provides as extreme
and the risks imposed on unntentional and
unwilling violatOrS of the provisions as
enormous. Such comment seems to us
neither fair nor just. 1t is true that section
violation
the offending carrier shall be liable 10 the in
Jured party for the actual damage sustained,
together with reasonable attorneys fee, to
be fixed by the court and collected with the
costs in the case. 1t is also true that section
ten
IMPOSES FINE
of not to exceed $4,000 upon common carriers
and their officers, agents and servants who
wilfully do or cause to be done, willingly
suffer or permit to be done, any prohibited
act upon conviction in Il district court OF the
United States. The remedy described in Sec
ton adds an attorneys fee to the existing
common law right of any injured party to
recover the full amount of his damages, Il
condition of affairs which cannot greatly
alarm corporations DISPOSED to fair dealing,
while the criminal remedy given
in section 10 obviously pertains to in
territorial violators OF the law, and
is in these cases to be graduated by the court
Good faith exhibited in an honest effort to
carry out the requirements of the law will in
yolye reasonable and fair-minded officials in
no danger of damages or fines. The elias
tlclty OF the statute In their favor is noticea-
Bile. The unjust discrimination of section
must be lin like and contemporaneous SER
vice in the transportation of a like kind of
traffic under substantially similar
circumstances and conditions The
preference or advantage of section
3 must be ''undue or unreasonable
Throughout the act as it now stands, in con-
fessediy experimental form, there is exhib-
TIED an obvious and generous purpose to
allow to the corporations ample scope in the
conduct of their business as common carriers
for the people and fair consideration of every
reasonable claim, while insisting upon Just
impartial, open ana consistent rates of
charge, to which every citizen shall be SUBJ
Ject alike whose situation is the same. Surely
the people could not ask for less. The Ian
guage and the tenor of the act
WHOLLY FAIL TO JUSTIFY
railroad managers, if any such there be- who
refuse to accept responsibilities, decline to
offer rates, neglect to announce conditions of
traffic, embarrass the customary interchange
of business and impose stagnaton upon trade
while they "stick in the BARK of the PHRASES
and expressions of the law, inventing doubts
and imagining dangers. 1t is still more I'M
justifable for railroad companies to make
use OF the general clauses of the law, ignor-
ing its modifying and charging words and
formulas in order to impose additional bur-
dens upon localities, trades, profess
SionS, manufactures, consumers, classes
of travellers or employees, strainfng and
representing every construction IN favor
OF the corporation treasury, and quoting the
new law as their authority for all manner of
petty eXactions. The powers of the commits.
sion are entirely adequate to cope with such
conduct, the existence of which is not af-
firmed, although it has been somewhat pub
licly suggested. The same statute which en-
acts that charges for like service snail be uni
form to all also provides that charges in every
case and for every kind and class of service
shall be reasonable and just. AS the law is
practically applied, it is said to contain many
elements of advantage to the economical
and profitable management of the business
of the carriers, which they have not
been slow to apprehend and take the benefit
OF. The commission ventures to express the
hope that with this explanation respecting
the mutual functions of the carriers and the
commissioners in carrying the law into effect
according to its true intent and meaning.
there will be no lack OF good faith and active
cooperation in continuing the normal activity
of every kind of reputable industry and
traffic throughout the land, under favorable,
fair and reasonable terms, concedlng frankly
to the people all the rights, benefits and ad-
vantages and equal privileges which the act
to regulate commerce was intended to secure
The commission then gives lengthy re-
ply to Decatur Axtell, receiver of the Rich
mond & Allegheny road. which, it says, is
A SAMPLE
of many of the same sort. Mr., AXtell is
Informed that his petition for relief is de.
ficient, not being verified. and fails to set
forth the state of facts on which relief is
claimed with sufficient clearness. The re-
ply proceeds:
The law under which we are acting laws
down general rule which is presumptvely
just, and which must be applied "a all cases,
unless facts are shown which make a par
ticular case clearly exceptional. These
should be shown by the petition which is pre-
scented tor relief, and the commission, before
it Can grant the relief must satisfy itself on
investigation that the fact is as stated, and
that they render the ordinary operation of
the law oppressive to an extent that
warrants an exception being made in
the petitioners favor. We do not think
you make such case of your petition. Its
statements are very brief and general, and
are quite as much expressions of opinion as
statements OF fact The prayer of the petit
ton is also too broad. You ask that the op-
Grafton of the law be suspended generally as
to your road; but the commission does not
grant general suspension as to any road, but
gives relief only as to the traffic between
specified points. For these reasons no order
is made on your petition" sssn3
The express companies having raised a
question as to whether they were subject
to the operations of the law, the commission
made ruling that it would hold in the af-
firmative, but would give hearing to any
company wishing to contest the point. The
Canadian Express company, in response to
whose inquiry this ruling was made, has
notified the commission that it is carrying
out the provisions of the interstate com
merce law, and it forwards copy of its
general tariff from offices in the United
States.